Monday, February 25, 2008
A Quick and Nasty Dissection of the Songwriter's Assoc. Net Tax Proposal
A critique of: "A PROPOSAL FOR THE MONETIZATION OF THE FILE SHARING OF MUSIC FROM THE SONGWRITERS AND RECORDING ARTISTS OF CANADA"
LINK TO FULL PROPOSAL TEXT:
LINK
"Most Canadians are aware that the Internet and mobile phone networks have become major sources of music. What they may not know is that songwriters and performers typically receive no compensation of any kind when their music is shared or illegally downloaded."
DF: Of course they know! That's why they are downloading songs-- they don't think your work is worth paying for... or at least, not worth paying $18/CD for.
We believe the time has come to put in place a reasonable and unobtrusive system of compensation for creators of music in regard to this popular and growing use of their work.
DF: $5 a month on my internet bill is your version of unobtrusive? That's offensive. You only think it's time because you want some money you're not getting now.
The plan we propose would not change or interfere with the way Canadians receive their music.
DF: $5 a month on my internet bill for what is now free sounds like a big change to me.
"No one would be sued for the online sharing of songs. On the contrary, the sharing of music on Peer-to-Peer networks and similar technologies would become perfectly legal."
DF: P2P should be legal without this crazy tax scheme.
"In addition, Music Publishers and Record Labels would be fairly compensated for the crucial role they play in supporting Canadian music creators."
DF: Canadian music would probably be better off if all the major labels disappeared next Tuesday.
"Canada has given the world some of the greatest music ever produced."
DF: I thought gifts were free?
We believe that implementing a fair way of compensating Canada’s music creators for the online sharing of their music will usher in a new Golden Age of creativity.
DF: Songwriters need more money to be more creative? Let's see-- let's have formal songwriter's exams, organize into songwriting into corporations, and pay songwriters at least $150k a year -- I mean, it works for law firms, it should work for record labels too, eh? At least they admit they want lots of money.
LINK TO FULL PROPOSAL TEXT:
LINK
"Most Canadians are aware that the Internet and mobile phone networks have become major sources of music. What they may not know is that songwriters and performers typically receive no compensation of any kind when their music is shared or illegally downloaded."
DF: Of course they know! That's why they are downloading songs-- they don't think your work is worth paying for... or at least, not worth paying $18/CD for.
We believe the time has come to put in place a reasonable and unobtrusive system of compensation for creators of music in regard to this popular and growing use of their work.
DF: $5 a month on my internet bill is your version of unobtrusive? That's offensive. You only think it's time because you want some money you're not getting now.
The plan we propose would not change or interfere with the way Canadians receive their music.
DF: $5 a month on my internet bill for what is now free sounds like a big change to me.
"No one would be sued for the online sharing of songs. On the contrary, the sharing of music on Peer-to-Peer networks and similar technologies would become perfectly legal."
DF: P2P should be legal without this crazy tax scheme.
"In addition, Music Publishers and Record Labels would be fairly compensated for the crucial role they play in supporting Canadian music creators."
DF: Canadian music would probably be better off if all the major labels disappeared next Tuesday.
"Canada has given the world some of the greatest music ever produced."
DF: I thought gifts were free?
We believe that implementing a fair way of compensating Canada’s music creators for the online sharing of their music will usher in a new Golden Age of creativity.
DF: Songwriters need more money to be more creative? Let's see-- let's have formal songwriter's exams, organize into songwriting into corporations, and pay songwriters at least $150k a year -- I mean, it works for law firms, it should work for record labels too, eh? At least they admit they want lots of money.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Business coalition opposes harsh copyright reform
From the CBC website:
"A who's who of powerful companies and business associations have banded together to push for less restrictive copyright reform, driving a stake into the heart of the federal government's argument for its new copyright bill."
Among other things, the Business Coalition for Balanced Copyright is calling for:
-A clause that prevents copyright owners from going after people or companies who circumvent for non-commercial reasons the technological protection measures placed on content. A record label, for example, should not be able to sue a consumer who gets around copy-protection measures in order to transfer a song to an iPod.
-No surcharges on downloadable content. Copyright owners have been pushing for downloads to be considered as "communications to the public," and say they should therefore be subject to an additional fee. The coalition believes such a charge would unfairly double the delivery cost of online music, films, games and other software.
-An exemption for violating copyright as part of legitimate business practices, such as when a broadcaster copies a show for its archives.
-No liability for internet service providers for the actions of their users.
LINK to CBC
ArsTechnica has a piece as well:
LINK to Ars
"A who's who of powerful companies and business associations have banded together to push for less restrictive copyright reform, driving a stake into the heart of the federal government's argument for its new copyright bill."
Among other things, the Business Coalition for Balanced Copyright is calling for:
-A clause that prevents copyright owners from going after people or companies who circumvent for non-commercial reasons the technological protection measures placed on content. A record label, for example, should not be able to sue a consumer who gets around copy-protection measures in order to transfer a song to an iPod.
-No surcharges on downloadable content. Copyright owners have been pushing for downloads to be considered as "communications to the public," and say they should therefore be subject to an additional fee. The coalition believes such a charge would unfairly double the delivery cost of online music, films, games and other software.
-An exemption for violating copyright as part of legitimate business practices, such as when a broadcaster copies a show for its archives.
-No liability for internet service providers for the actions of their users.
LINK to CBC
ArsTechnica has a piece as well:
LINK to Ars
